Seoul
Chief MD, Gangnam
Duk-ha Kim
The trust our patients have placed in this clinic was built on conviction and principle. We intend to hold to both, unchanged, through the next hundred years.
Pore-focused treatment category guide
Pore Treatment
Pore treatment is a heading that covers RF microneedling, fractional lasers and review-exempt care items rather than one procedure. None of them is registered as a pore treatment: the word does not appear in the fractional laser indications, and the RF microneedling device is recorded as an electrosurgical instrument.
- Category, not one device
- RF microneedling, fractional lasers and exempt-class care items listed together
- What a pore is
- The dilated opening of a pilosebaceous follicle
- After a single session
- Retrospective, uncontrolled study: moderate-to-excellent improvement in 13.8% of noses, 8.9% of foreheads, 11.1% of cheeks
- Publicly flagged risk
- FDA safety communication on RF microneedling: burns, scarring, fat loss, disfigurement, nerve damage
What does ‘pore’ actually refer to on a treatment menu?
It refers to the dilated opening of a pilosebaceous follicle — the channel that carries a hair and the sebaceous gland’s output to the surface. A 2023 review describes visible facial pores in exactly those terms and lists age, sex, genetics, UV exposure, ethnicity and sebum production as the factors associated with how visible they become. Nothing on a menu opens or closes that structure; what is being addressed is the size and the shadow of an opening that is already there. The review pooled 19 clinical trials covering 591 patients and notes that measurement methods differed between trials, which is why its framework is more reliable than any single number inside it.
Sources: Parvar SY et al., J Cosmet Dermatol 2023 — facial pore treatment review
Why do pores look larger on some faces?
Two measurable skin properties track with it. An instrument-based 2013 study of 60 volunteers — 30 men and 30 women — found sebum output positively correlated with pore measurements and skin elasticity negatively correlated: more sebum and less elasticity went with more visible pores. Male sex and a history of acne were associated with a higher pore count in the same cohort. This was a cross-sectional correlation study with a small sample, so it identifies associations rather than causes, and it does not establish that changing one of those variables changes how pores look.
Sources: Kim BY et al., Skin Res Technol 2013 — sebum, elasticity and gender in facial poresParvar SY et al., J Cosmet Dermatol 2023 — facial pore treatment review
What does an RF microneedling device actually do?
It drives fine needles into the skin and releases radiofrequency energy from the needles rather than from the surface. The manufacturer of one widely listed system specifies monopolar and bipolar modes at 1 MHz and 2 MHz, with needle depth adjustable from 0.5 to 4.0 mm in 0.25 mm steps. Tip design decides where the energy leaves the needle: an insulated tip emits RF only from the distal 0.3 mm, which spares the epidermis, while a semi-insulated tip emits from two zones along the needle shaft. These are manufacturer specifications describing how energy is placed — they are not efficacy claims, and they say nothing about what result follows.
Sources: Jeisys Medical — technology specificationsFDA 510(k) K192545 — POTENZA, Jeisys Medical, product code GEI
How is a fractional laser different from RF microneedling?
The energy is light rather than current, and it enters through the skin surface instead of through needles. A non-ablative fractional laser targets water in the tissue and creates microscopic treatment zones in the dermis without damaging the epidermis, provoking a wound-healing response. RF microneedling instead deposits energy at a mechanically set needle depth. Because the two route energy differently, they are not stronger and weaker versions of one procedure, and this page holds no head-to-head trial comparing them for pore appearance.
Sources: Friedman et al., Dermatol Surg 2022 — 1550/1927 nm non-ablative fractional best practicesJeisys Medical — technology specifications
What did regulators actually review, and what did they not?
There is no FDA-approved pore treatment on this menu, and the records show why. The published indications for the 1550 nm fractional system cover coagulation of soft tissue, skin resurfacing, and treatment of dyschromia and cutaneous lesions including lentigos, solar lentigos, actinic keratosis and melasma, plus periorbital wrinkles, acne scars and surgical scars — the word ‘pores’ does not appear anywhere in that wording. The RF microneedling clearance K192545 (Jeisys Medical, found substantially equivalent on 20 February 2020) is filed under product code GEI, an electrosurgical cutting and coagulation device under 21 CFR 878.4400; that is a regulatory category for an electrosurgical instrument, not a finding about pores. Hydro-peel style care items sit under product code GFE, a powered dermabrasion brush classified Class I and exempt from 510(k), which means the agency never assessed their effectiveness or indications at all. Clearance is country-specific, and a marketing name does not map one-to-one onto a clearance number or a device generation.
Sources: Fraxel official HCP site — indicationsFDA 510(k) K192545 — POTENZA, Jeisys Medical, product code GEIFDA Product Classification GFE — powered dermabrasion brush, Class I, 510(k) exempt
What do the published numbers say about a single session?
They say that one session did little for most treated areas. A 2022 retrospective observational study of 75 people (mean age 29, 69 women, no control group, mean 1.7 sessions) recorded moderate-to-excellent improvement after a single RF microneedling session for the nose in 13.8% of cases, the forehead in 8.9% and the cheek in 11.1%, with the proportion rising as more sessions were performed. A pulse width of 300 ms performed significantly better than 100-200 ms in that cohort. The limitations are substantial: retrospective, no control group, non-uniform parameters and insufficiently specified follow-up. The 2023 review of 19 trials and 591 patients reaches the same practical conclusion from a different direction — improvement is associated with repeated sessions and combination approaches rather than with one exposure.
Sources: Ren K et al., J Cosmet Dermatol 2022 — RF microneedling for enlarged facial poresParvar SY et al., J Cosmet Dermatol 2023 — facial pore treatment review
What risks has the FDA publicly flagged?
On 15 October 2025 the FDA issued a safety communication on radiofrequency microneedling reporting burns, scarring, fat loss, disfigurement and nerve damage, including cases that required surgical or medical intervention. The agency states that RF microneedling is a medical procedure rather than a cosmetic or spa service, and that these devices are not intended for home use. Reports collected in a safety communication are not an incidence rate — they describe what has been reported, not how often it occurs — but they set the floor for what a consultation has to cover. The 2023 review separately characterises adverse events across pore-treatment trials as generally mild and reversible; the two statements describe different bodies of evidence and should be read together rather than one cancelling the other.
Sources: FDA Safety Communication, 15 Oct 2025 — potential risks of RF microneedlingParvar SY et al., J Cosmet Dermatol 2023 — facial pore treatment review
How does skin tone change the settings?
It changes energy, density, interval and sometimes whether the treatment is appropriate at all. With non-ablative fractional treatment, post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation risk is tied to energy and density; a review written specifically for Fitzpatrick IV-VI reports that treatment density is a stronger driver of PIH than energy, and that a lower-density approach produced significantly less PIH than full-density treatment. Best-practice guidance for 1550/1927 nm recommends lower treatment levels in Fitzpatrick IV-VI with coverage of roughly 9-20%, intervals of 6-8 weeks instead of 4-6, and adjunctive lightening agents. The same guidance does not recommend non-ablative fractional resurfacing as a first-line treatment for melasma in Fitzpatrick V-VI.
Sources: Kaushik SB & Alexis AF, JCAD 2017 — non-ablative fractional resurfacing in skin of colorFriedman et al., Dermatol Surg 2022 — 1550/1927 nm non-ablative fractional best practices
How should you read a menu name that joins a device to a product?
Read it as a clinic protocol, not as a separately approved procedure. Items that pair an RF microneedling device with an injected or applied substance describe a combination the clinic performs; there is no separate clearance covering the combined name, and this page holds no verified source establishing a regulatory status or an outcome for any such pairing. The 2023 review does support combination approaches as a general direction, but it does not validate a particular branded combination. Some menus also list ultrasound-based skin-care items, which sit in a different device category from the resurfacing and radiofrequency devices described here. The useful questions are which device, which substance, how much of it, and what each part of the combination is expected to do.
Sources: Parvar SY et al., J Cosmet Dermatol 2023 — facial pore treatment reviewFDA 510(k) K192545 — POTENZA, Jeisys Medical, product code GEI
How long does the effect last?
The 2022 retrospective study is the most specific record on this page: 75 people, no control group, mean 1.7 sessions, with moderate-to-excellent improvement after a single RF microneedling session recorded in 13.8% of noses, 8.9% of foreheads and 11.1% of cheeks — a minority after one session, rising as more sessions were added. The 2023 review of 19 trials (591 patients) reaches the same practical direction: improvement tracks with repeated sessions and combination approaches, not a single exposure. Neither source reports a follow-up point after the treatment course ended, so this page has no source stating how long a pore result holds once sessions stop. Hydra-peel style care items on the same menu sit under a Class I, 510(k)-exempt product code, meaning a regulator has never reviewed their effectiveness at all — a different question from duration, but a reminder that not every item on a pore menu carries the same evidence behind it. Since sebum output and skin elasticity are the two factors the cited correlation study actually ties to pore appearance, ask the clinic how those two are expected to change with your plan, and what its own experience is for how long a result is maintained before a touch-up is suggested.
Sources: Ren K et al., J Cosmet Dermatol 2022 — RF microneedling for enlarged facial poresParvar SY et al., J Cosmet Dermatol 2023 — facial pore treatment reviewKim BY et al., Skin Res Technol 2013 — sebum, elasticity and gender in facial poresFDA Product Classification GFE — powered dermabrasion brush, Class I, 510(k) exempt
What should you confirm before booking?
Confirm the device, the settings and who is responsible if something goes wrong — in writing. Ask for the exact device name and generation, whether RF or laser energy is used, needle depth and tip type or wavelength and coverage, how many sessions the plan assumes and at what interval, your Fitzpatrick type and how the settings account for it, whether any substance is being added and exactly what it is, and who performs the procedure. Disclose pregnancy or breastfeeding, implanted electronic devices or metal near the treatment area, isotretinoin use, a history of keloids or post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation, active infection or inflamed skin, and recent injectables, lasers or RF. The following list is general post-procedure safety guidance rather than a finding of the studies cited here: contact the clinic promptly for blistering, a suspected burn, pain that increases instead of settling, drainage, spreading redness or warmth, a crust that will not heal, new numbness or weakness, or an area that becomes visibly indented. Seek emergency care for difficulty breathing or sudden swelling of the lips, mouth, tongue or throat.
Sources: FDA Safety Communication, 15 Oct 2025 — potential risks of RF microneedlingFriedman et al., Dermatol Surg 2022 — 1550/1927 nm non-ablative fractional best practices
RF microneedling, fractional laser or an exempt-class care item?
These are four different regulatory and mechanical categories that sit side by side under one menu heading. The table maps what each one is on paper — nothing here ranks them, and no source on this page compares them head-to-head for pore appearance.
| Approach | How the records classify it | Does it break the skin barrier? | Pigmentation risk in the cited sources | Confirm before booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RF microneedling | Cleared under product code GEI — electrosurgical cutting and coagulation, 21 CFR 878.4400 (K192545, substantially equivalent 20 Feb 2020). An electrosurgical classification, not a pore indication | Yes — needles penetrate to a set depth, 0.5-4.0 mm on the system whose specifications are published | Not quantified by skin type in the sources here; the FDA safety communication reports burns, scarring, fat loss, disfigurement and nerve damage | Exact model and generation, needle depth, insulated or semi-insulated tip, pulse width, number of passes and planned sessions |
| Non-ablative fractional laser | Published 1550 nm indications cover soft-tissue coagulation, resurfacing, dyschromia, lentigos, actinic keratosis, melasma, periorbital wrinkles, acne scars and surgical scars — ‘pores’ is not among them | No — microscopic treatment zones are created in the dermis while the epidermis is left intact | Tied to energy and density; density is the stronger driver in Fitzpatrick IV-VI, where coverage of about 9-20% and 6-8 week intervals are advised | Wavelength, treatment level and coverage percentage, interval between sessions, and whether lightening agents are prescribed alongside |
| Ablative fractional | Defined by contrast in the non-ablative literature: the epidermis is removed rather than spared. This page holds no verified source giving indications or outcome data for ablative devices in pore treatment | Yes — the epidermis is ablated | No verified figure on this page; the sources quantify pigmentation risk only for non-ablative fractional treatment in skin of colour | Which specific device and registered indication is being proposed, the expected healing course, and why an ablative approach is preferred here |
| Exempt-class care items (hydro-peel style) | Product code GFE — powered dermabrasion brush, 21 CFR 878.4820, Class I and exempt from 510(k). Effectiveness and indications were never reviewed by the agency | No — surface-level care | Not addressed in the sources on this page | That it is being offered as surface care rather than as a treatment carrying a regulatory endorsement, and exactly what is applied to the skin |
None of the rows above is an FDA-approved pore treatment. Two are cleared or classified for something else, one is exempt from review entirely, and one has no verified source on this page for this use. Marketing names are deliberately not matched one-to-one to clearance numbers, because a menu name and a registered device record are frequently not the same thing.
Sources: FDA 510(k) K192545 — POTENZA, Jeisys Medical, product code GEIFraxel official HCP site — indicationsFDA Product Classification GFE — powered dermabrasion brush, Class I, 510(k) exemptFriedman et al., Dermatol Surg 2022 — 1550/1927 nm non-ablative fractional best practicesKaushik SB & Alexis AF, JCAD 2017 — non-ablative fractional resurfacing in skin of colorFDA Safety Communication, 15 Oct 2025 — potential risks of RF microneedling
Medical care at Abijou
Care is provided by the medical team at the branch you select. These clinicians lead the three branches linked from this guide; confirm the doctor assigned to your visit with that branch.
Chief MD, Myeongdong
Cheol-su Yoon
I want to be thinking about how the patient feels right up to the last moment of the procedure.
Chief MD, Hongdae
Jae-wook Kim
I will give my best with the attentiveness to catch even the smallest change.
Listed branch medical team — not a medical-review byline for this article.
Frequently asked questions
What does ‘non-ablative’ mean?
It means the epidermis is left intact. A non-ablative fractional laser targets water in the tissue and creates microscopic treatment zones in the dermis without removing the surface layer, and the wound-healing response that follows is what the treatment is built on. Ablative approaches, by contrast, remove the epidermis. The word describes the mechanism and the recovery it implies — it is not a strength rating or a price tier.
What is PIH, and why does it keep coming up on this page?
PIH is post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation: skin that darkens after inflammation or injury, including injury delivered deliberately by an energy device. It recurs here because the sources treat it as the risk that scales with how a treatment is set rather than with how the device is branded. For non-ablative fractional treatment the risk is tied to energy and density, and in a review written for Fitzpatrick IV-VI, density was the stronger driver — a lower-density protocol produced significantly less PIH than full-density treatment.
What is supposed to happen in the skin after the microscopic zones are made?
They set off a wound-healing response in the dermis. A non-ablative fractional laser deposits energy into water in the tissue, creating columns of treated dermis while the epidermis stays intact, and the repair that follows over weeks is the mechanism — not a change visible on the day. That is why published guidance is written around intervals between sessions (4-6 weeks generally, 6-8 weeks in Fitzpatrick IV-VI) and why the pooled review of 19 trials associates improvement with repeated sessions and combination approaches rather than with one exposure.
RF microneedling or a fractional laser — which one is the pore treatment?
Neither is registered for pores, and the sources here do not rank them. RF microneedling places energy through needles at a mechanically set depth (0.5-4.0 mm on the system with published specifications) and is recorded in the US as an electrosurgical cutting and coagulation device. A non-ablative fractional laser sends light through the intact surface to create microscopic zones in the dermis, and its published indications list resurfacing, dyschromia and scars without mentioning pores. There is no head-to-head trial on this page, so the choice follows your diagnosis, your skin type and the risk profile rather than a category name.
Is a hydro-peel style ‘pore care’ item the same kind of thing as a laser or an RF device?
No — it sits in a different regulatory class entirely. Powered dermabrasion brushes fall under product code GFE, 21 CFR 878.4820, which is Class I and exempt from 510(k), so the agency has not evaluated effectiveness or indications for that class. A device cleared through 510(k) at least has a record of substantial equivalence to a predicate for a stated intended use. Exempt does not mean unsafe and cleared does not mean proven for pores; it means the two items are not tiers of one treatment and should not be compared as if they were.
Is ablative fractional treatment simply a stronger version of the non-ablative one?
No — the difference is whether the epidermis is removed, which makes it a different procedure with a different recovery, not a higher setting. The literature cited here defines non-ablative treatment by the epidermis being spared while microscopic zones are created in the dermis. This page holds no verified source giving indications, outcomes or pigmentation rates for ablative fractional devices in pore treatment, so no result comparison between the two can be drawn from it. If an ablative option is proposed, ask what that specific device is registered for and what the healing course involves.
How uncomfortable is it, and what reactions were recorded in the studies?
The retrospective RF microneedling study recorded pain, erythema and oedema as its adverse events, with some acneiform eruptions. The 2023 review of 19 trials describes adverse events across pore treatments as generally mild and reversible. Both are observations from uncontrolled or heterogeneous studies rather than a guaranteed experience, and they sit alongside the FDA safety communication reporting burns, scarring, fat loss, disfigurement and nerve damage from RF microneedling, some of which required surgical or medical intervention.
When can I wear makeup, exercise or fly home?
Only the clinic that treated you can set that schedule — no source on this page publishes a downtime timetable for these treatments. What the sources do give is the spacing between sessions (4-6 weeks generally for 1550/1927 nm treatment, 6-8 weeks in Fitzpatrick IV-VI) and the reactions recorded in the studies. Before travelling, get the device name and settings in writing, ask how long sun protection is required and which products to use, and confirm how to reach the clinic from abroad. Contact them promptly for blistering, a suspected burn, pain that increases rather than settles, spreading redness or warmth, or a crust that will not heal.
How many sessions does the evidence assume?
More than one, and the published figures make the reason plain. In the retrospective study of 75 people, moderate-to-excellent improvement after a single session was recorded for the nose in 13.8% of cases, the forehead in 8.9% and the cheek in 11.1%, with the proportion rising as more sessions were performed; that cohort averaged 1.7 sessions. The 2023 review of 19 trials and 591 patients likewise associates improvement with repeated sessions and combination approaches. How many suits you depends on the plan and your skin type, and the interval widens to 6-8 weeks in Fitzpatrick IV-VI.
It is called minimally invasive, so is the risk small?
No. The FDA safety communication of 15 October 2025 reports burns, scarring, fat loss, disfigurement and nerve damage after RF microneedling, including cases that needed surgical or medical intervention, and states that this is a medical procedure rather than a cosmetic or spa service. Needles that penetrate several millimetres and release energy beneath the skin carry the risks of a medical procedure however the downtime is marketed.
Can I get the same thing from a home microneedling or RF gadget?
No — the FDA states that RF microneedling devices are not intended for home use and that the procedure is a medical one. The specifications documented here, including needle depth adjustable between 0.5 and 4.0 mm and RF emitted from a defined segment of an insulated needle, describe equipment operated in a clinical setting under a clinician’s control. This page holds no source on consumer devices and makes no claim about them beyond the agency’s position that these procedures do not belong at home.
The clinic says the device is FDA-cleared. What does that number actually cover?
It records that the device was found substantially equivalent to an existing device for a stated intended use — it is not proof of effectiveness for pores. K192545 (Jeisys Medical, substantially equivalent on 20 February 2020) is filed under product code GEI, an electrosurgical cutting and coagulation device under 21 CFR 878.4400. A US clearance applies to the US only and says nothing about the registration that applies in Korea or in your home country, and a marketing name does not map one-to-one onto a clearance number or a device generation. Ask which unit, which generation and which national registration applies to the machine in that room.
Why do quotes differ so much between clinics, and how do I compare them?
Align what is inside each quote before comparing the amounts. Confirm the exact device and generation, the energy type, needle depth and tip type or wavelength and coverage, the number of passes, whether the price covers one session or a package, whether any injected or applied substance is included and precisely what it is, and what aftercare and follow-up are covered. Two quotes built on different depths, coverage or session counts are not the same treatment, so a menu name on its own is not a comparison.
Who is this suitable for, and can I do it on a short trip to Korea?
Suitability is decided at an in-person consultation, and your skin type is part of that decision. Published guidance for 1550/1927 nm non-ablative fractional treatment recommends lower treatment levels with coverage of roughly 9-20% in Fitzpatrick IV-VI, wider 6-8 week intervals and adjunctive lightening agents, and it does not recommend the treatment as first-line for melasma in Fitzpatrick V-VI. Because the evidence points to repeated sessions rather than a single visit, tell the clinic your travel dates, medicines, pigmentation history and recent procedures so the timing and the follow-up can be judged before anything is booked.
How Abijou works
We started in Gangnam in 2006 and the network now runs 17 branches across Korea. The line we work to is skin transformation woven into everyday life — care you can keep up with, rather than one dramatic change.
- Across the 17 branches in Seoul, Gyeonggi, Incheon and Busan: over 1,000 medical professionals and more than 350 certified medical devices
- Authentic products only, in appropriate amounts — the treatment is fitted to the condition, not to a package
- Prices are quoted from each branch’s published price list as it stands
Contact and location
- Phone
- 1544-0377
Free Consultation
Booking happens at the branch
There is no inquiry form on this page. Once you have picked a branch above, open that branch’s site or the official reservation center and choose a time yourself.
- No deposit and no online prepayment — everything is paid at the visit
- Per-treatment prices are published for each branch on the official reservation center
- English, Japanese and Chinese are supported alongside Korean